If Jokic wins MVP again the award is officially a joke

[wagexslave]

Dude's leading his team to a play-in spot. Since when did #7 seeds start getting MVP consideration? Sure his stats on paper are great, but I'm supposed to take the MVP award seriously when you can win it with the #7 seed? We all know he's trash on defense too which is half the game.

Since when did wins not matter in general? It used to go to the best player on the best team(or at least close to best). Sh*t the Suns are literally 9 games above the #2 team in the league, still winning hella games despite multiple starters+6th man out(including CP3), and Booker isn't even in the CONVERSATION for MVP. And the Suns swept Jokic effortlessly last year, where did that MVP award get him?

They better AT LEAST give it to someone on a top 3 seed. Give it to Giannis or Embiid and I'll be fine with that. They've got the stats, the defense, and are at least closer to the top seed than Jokic.

[RogueBorg]

Dude's leading his team to a play-in spot. Since when did #7 seeds start getting MVP consideration? Sure his stats on paper are great, but I'm supposed to take the MVP award seriously when you can win it with the #7 seed? We all know he's trash on defense too which is half the game.

Since when did wins not matter in general? It used to go to the best player on the best team(or at least close to best). Sh*t the Suns are literally 9 games above the #2 team in the league, still winning hella games despite multiple starters+6th man out(including CP3), and Booker isn't even in the CONVERSATION for MVP. And the Suns swept Jokic effortlessly last year, where did that MVP award get him?

They better AT LEAST give it to someone on a top 3 seed. Give it to Giannis or Embiid and I'll be fine with that. They've got the stats, the defense, and are at least closer to the top seed than Jokic.

Jokic will not win MVP this year especially having won it last year and his team taking a step backwards this year. Wins DO matter in the MVP vote.

[tontoz]

Let's just ignore that Denver is 12 games over .500 in without their 2nd and 3rd options all season. Let's also ignore the advanced stats where Jokic is the league leader.

:facepalm

[AlternativeAcc.]

Yeah, would be a real tragedy for the MVP award to go to the most valuable player.

[RogueBorg]

Let's just ignore that Denver is 12 games over .500 in without their 2nd and 3rd options all season. Let's also ignore the advanced stats where Jokic is the league leader.

:facepalm

Let's just ignore the fact that if the season ended today they'd be in the play-in tourny :facepalm

[tontoz]

Let's just ignore the fact that if the season ended today they'd be in the play-in tourny :facepalm

Funny but you can't seem to make up your mind. One post you say the record is what matters, then you change it up and say playoff seeding matters. Maybe you should just argue with yourself.

[RogueBorg]

Funny but you can't seem to make up your mind. One post you say the record is what matters, then you change it up and say playoff seeding matters. Maybe you should just argue with yourself.

They go hand in hand do they not? Record is part of the seeding. Their record has them as the 7th seed, in the play-in tourny.

[tontoz]

They go hand in hand do they not? Record is part of the seeding. Their record has them as the 7th seed, in the play-in tourny.


The Lakers are in the play in tourney also but they are 11.5 games behind Denver.

[SouBeachTalents]

So I guess the fact that Jokic's been missing his two best teammates the entire season shouldn't be mentioned even once in the OP. Or that despite this, this is how the Nuggets stack up to the other MVP candidates teams as of this morning

Bucks: 44-27
76ers: 43-27
Nuggets: 42-30

Damn, what a joke it'd be if Jokic was MVP with only a marginally worse record. Forget the fact that if the Bucks or Sixers were in the West neither of them would even be a top 4 seed.

[RogueBorg]

The Lakers are in the play in tourney also but they are 11.5 games behind Denver.

The Lakers are not part of the equation for the NBA vote.

[rotgo]

First thing that came to my mind when I saw the title is "then it makes sense that it is given to the JOKER!"

Sorry I could not resist.:oldlol:

[ArbitraryWater]

They're 12 games above .500 you dumbass.


Half his starters are bench players and he has them 2 games behind the Bucks and Sixers.

[RogueBorg]

So I guess the fact that Jokic's been missing his two best teammates the entire season shouldn't be mentioned even once in the OP. Or that despite this, this is how the Nuggets stack up to the other MVP candidates teams as of this morning

Bucks: 44-27
76ers: 43-27
Nuggets: 42-30

Damn, what a joke it'd be if Jokic was MVP with only a marginally worse record. Forget the fact that if the Bucks or Sixers were in the West neither of them would even be a top 4 seed.

Were Jokic's two best teammates lost to injury All-Stars?

[RogueBorg]

They're 12 games above .500 you dumbass.

Finish the sentence, they're 12 games above .500 currently in the 7th position, a play-in position.

Is that not true?

[ArbitraryWater]

Finish the sentence, they're 12 games above .500 currently in the 7th position, a play-in position.

Is that not true?

so?

Why would where the rest of the conference is at matter more than what Jokic is doing with his team?

[RogueBorg]

So I guess the fact that Jokic's been missing his two best teammates the entire season shouldn't be mentioned even once in the OP. Or that despite this, this is how the Nuggets stack up to the other MVP candidates teams as of this morning

Bucks: 44-27
76ers: 43-27
Nuggets: 42-30

Damn, what a joke it'd be if Jokic was MVP with only a marginally worse record. Forget the fact that if the Bucks or Sixers were in the West neither of them would even be a top 4 seed.

The Bucks and Sixers seeding has nothing to do with Denver's...irrelevant.

[SouBeachTalents]

The Bucks and Sixers seeding has nothing to do with Denver's...irrelevant.
What the fck are you talking about :oldlol: The entire premise of OP's thread is, despite having very similar records, it'd be a joke if Jokic won MVP over Giannis or Embiid due to the fact that they're the 7 seed. When if the Bucks & 76ers were in his conference, they wouldn't even be a top 4 seed and in fact, would only be a game or two away from being in the play in tournament themselves.

[RogueBorg]

so?

Why would where the rest of the conference is at matter more than what Jokic is doing with his team?

Because they're not going to give the MVP to a player who won MVP last year whose team makes the play-in tournament this year. They're just not going to do it. I would give it to Morant, I know most of you disagree, so if not Morant, it's going to be Embiid. The voters are going to look at the season he's having, losing Simmons, and they're still in the race for top seed in the East not some play-in tourny.

[RogueBorg]

When if the Bucks & 76ers were in his conference, they wouldn't even be a top 4 seed and in fact, would only be a game or two away from being in the play in tournament themselves.

IFs, you're talking IF's, the facts are the Bucks and Sixers play out East, they have nothing to do with what seed Denver is in right now.
If you want to play the what-if game then I can do that too, IF Denver had a better record than Phoenix they'd be the top seed. But they don't.

[GrayGoat]

Morant doesn’t play any defense and the Grizz have a better win percentage without him. Tatum honestly has a better case

[ShawkFactory]

IFs, you're talking IF's, the facts are the Bucks and Sixers play out East, they have nothing to do with what seed Denver is in right now.
If you want to play the what-if game then I can do that too, IF Denver had a better record than Phoenix they'd be the top seed. But they don't.

Those "IF's" are not equal at all. One of them is completely circumstantial.

[tontoz]

The Lakers are not part of the equation for the NBA vote.

They are in the play in just like Denver. So does the play in matter, or does the record matter?

Just last year Curry was a MVP finalist even though his team finished with the 8 seed.

[RogueBorg]

Just last year Curry was a MVP finalist even though his team finished with the 8 seed.

That's my point, Curry didn't win MVP last year with his team finishing in the play-in. Jokic won it because Denver finished as the 3rd seed and he had a great season.
I'm not saying Jokic is not a candidate for MVP, of course he is, but like Curry last year I don't think he's going to win it.

[RRR3]

If you think anyone besides Jokic should be MVP you’re wrong. Sorry.

[tpols]

So I guess the fact that Jokic's been missing his two best teammates the entire season shouldn't be mentioned even once in the OP. Or that despite this, this is how the Nuggets stack up to the other MVP candidates teams as of this morning

Bucks: 44-27
76ers: 43-27
Nuggets: 42-30

Damn, what a joke it'd be if Jokic was MVP with only a marginally worse record. Forget the fact that if the Bucks or Sixers were in the West neither of them would even be a top 4 seed.

Wow this makes OPs post even more of a joke. Literally 1 game off and he's acting like they're 15 games off. Nevermind the fact that Jokic is carrying a team that would win 15 games without him... He's literally carrying scrubs while Embiid and Giannis have loaded casts by comparison. I was watching the suns game last night and the announcer said the suns team is the deepest team He's seen in the last 10 years. Devin Booker on the current nuggets would win about 20 games.

[RogueBorg]

So does the play in matter, or does the record matter?



One begets the other. You can't determine the seeding without the record relative to the records of other teams in your conference. Philadelphia and Milwaukee's record has nothing to do with seeding in the West.

[RogueBorg]

If you think anyone besides Jokic should be MVP you’re wrong. Sorry.

It's never been a "stats only" award, sorry to break it to you.

[RogueBorg]

Nevermind the fact that Jokic is carrying a team that would win 15 games without him...

You can't prove this therefore it is not a fact.

[RogueBorg]

Devin Booker on the current nuggets would win about 20 games.

Again, speculation, not provable.

[tontoz]

That's my point, Curry didn't win MVP last year with his team finishing in the play-in. Jokic won it because Denver finished as the 3rd seed and he had a great season.
I'm not saying Jokic is not a candidate for MVP, of course he is, but like Curry last year I don't think he's going to win it.


If being in the play in mattered he wouldn't have been a finalist. He was a finalist because the voters actually looked at his circumstances.

Jokic won because of how well he played.

Philly was the top seed last year. Denver was 3rd seed after winning a tiebreaker with the fourth seed lol. Obviously the seeding didn't matter much.

[RogueBorg]

If being in the play in mattered he wouldn't have been a finalist. He was a finalist because the voters actually looked at his circumstances.

Jokic won because of how well he played.

.[/B]

Yes and no, Jokic won because his team was the 3rd seed and Curry's was 8th. There's always been an aspect to team success in winning the MVP. If it was best stats only it would be Lebron just about every year. Flip the Warriors and Nuggets around last year and I would bet Curry wins the MVP.

[wagexslave]

What the fck are you talking about :oldlol: The entire premise of OP's thread is, despite having very similar records, it'd be a joke if Jokic won MVP over Giannis or Embiid due to the fact that they're the 7 seed. When if the Bucks & 76ers were in his conference, they wouldn't even be a top 4 seed and in fact, would only be a game or two away from being in the play in tournament themselves.

You do make a good point, that the records aren't that different. BUT at least those guys are good defenders unlike Jokic. That's a significant factor in your value as a player, I don't care what anybody says. Especially in the playoffs. Athleticism too. Is anybody going to tell me with a straight face that they'd rather have Jokic on their team than Giannis?

And at the end of the day whether the records are similar or not, the point still stands that he's a 7th seed player which just doesn't look good no matter which way people try to swing it. And I don't want to hear about injuries either. Whether or not teammates had injuries has never been a big handicap when it comes to winning MVPs. And besides so many teams have been dealing with injuries this year anyways, not just the Nugs.

[RogueBorg]

And besides so many teams have been dealing with injuries this year anyways, not just the Nugs.

Good point about injuries. Has Golden State not been dealing with injuries? If Jokic is MVP why isn't Denver ahead of Golden State with Curry having an off year and no Draymond Green for awhile now? How many games has Ja Morant missed? Why isn't Denver ahead of Memphis? Alot of you keeping harping on Denver's record, is it really that impressive considering?

[wagexslave]

Wow this makes OPs post even more of a joke. Literally 1 game off and he's acting like they're 15 games off. Nevermind the fact that Jokic is carrying a team that would win 15 games without him... He's literally carrying scrubs while Embiid and Giannis have loaded casts by comparison. I was watching the suns game last night and the announcer said the suns team is the deepest team He's seen in the last 10 years. Devin Booker on the current nuggets would win about 20 games.

"Loaded casts" literally the Sixers had Simmons sitting on his ass all season until recently they got Harden. And the Bucks 2nd best player Middleton is, at best, an inconsistent fringe All Star. We saw Giannis straight up carry that team in the Finals.

Btw the Suns had like 6 players out last night(CP3, Crowder, Cam Payne, Cam Johnson, Saric, Kaminsky) and were literally starting Elfrid Payton at point guard, one of the worst NBA players I've ever seen in my life. I don't want to hear shit about Devin Booker not being able to "carry scrubs".

[tontoz]

Yes and no, Jokic won because his team was the 3rd seed and Curry's was 8th. There's always been an aspect to team success in winning the MVP. If it was best stats only it would be Lebron just about every year. Flip the Warriors and Nuggets around last year and I would bet Curry wins the MVP.

So how did Embiid with the first seed lose to Jokic who finished tied for the 3rd seed just last season?

Curry got 5 first place votes last year. Embiid only got 1 first place vote.

[tpols]

"Loaded casts" literally the Sixers had Simmons sitting on his ass all season until recently they got Harden. And the Bucks 2nd best player Middleton is, at best, an inconsistent fringe All Star. We saw Giannis straight up carry that team in the Finals.

Btw the Suns had like 6 players out last night(CP3, Crowder, Cam Payne, Cam Johnson, Saric, Kaminsky) and were literally starting Elfrid Payton at point guard, one of the worst NBA players I've ever seen in my life. I don't want to hear shit about Devin Booker not being able to "carry scrubs".

Kris Middleton is a bona fide multiple selection All Star player and the bucks are a great team. Giannis literally missed the end of the ECFs last year and the Bucks won the series without him. Nuggets don't win shit without Jokic. Will Barton is the Nuggets 2nd leading scorer at 14 ppg this year. How much dope have you been smoking?

Comparing Booker to Jokic is ban worthy. Its like comparing Dame Lilliard to prime Larry Bird. Booker can't elevate teammates like Bird or Jokic. He's a simple shooter scorer npc all star talent. Even prime Dame was actually better.

[tpols]

I just looked it up. Booker and Middleton have both made exactly the same amount of All Star games at 3 a piece. Yet one is an "MVP" and the other a fringe all star. :oldlol: what a joke.

[FultzNationRISE]

Jokic is not a bad defender. That’s an assumption made based on, I guess, the fact he’s white.

[Shogon]

This forum gargles balls.

[warriorfan]

Op fuming

[Derka]

Arguing that seeding matters in MVP voting. What a stupid f*cking retarded thread.

[Shogon]

Arguing that seeding matters in MVP voting. What a stupid f*cking retarded thread.

IDK if you're trolling or not but typically throughout history seeding has mattered a lot.

And it's mattered a lot because people are retarded.

Nobody can agree on what the word valuable means because they're too stupid to understand it really just means 'best.' It's the top individual award in the entire ****ing sport.

ANYTHING other than 'best' is just a complete misunderstanding of what the word valuable really even means at its root and a bunch of mental gymnastic goalpost moving bullshit.

The NBA should be ****ing ashamed of themselves for not renaming the award.


Let me clarify this for everyone on how this award SHOULD be interpreted, even though it clearly is not.

MOST valuable = BEST PLAYER = if you rearranged every player to every possible combination of players in the league and had them all play every single other combination of players in the league, including teams with clones of themselves, which singular player's teams under said exponential combination of players/teams would win the most games when comparing them to other singular players.

Who is the best player? That's it. Period.

Not who is the best 1 on 1 player. Not who is the most valuable to their particular team. Not who is the best player on a top seeded team. Not who is the best player on the best team. Not 'whatever bullshit goalpost moving narrative the media wants to come up with', either.

Ok? Who is the best player? The objective is to win. Who would yield the most wins regardless of circumstance of teammates, coaching, etc.

That's who the MVP ACTUALLY is regardless of who ends up winning the award in any given year. And this year it sure as shit is either Jokic, Embiid, or Giannis. I would not laugh at anyone that said Curry, Durant or Doncic. But I WOULD laugh at anyone that named a player outside of those 6.

[RogueBorg]

So how did Embiid with the first seed lose to Jokic who finished tied for the 3rd seed just last season?

Curry got 5 first place votes last year. Embiid only got 1 first place vote.

Embiid played 51 games out of 72, that's why.

[wagexslave]

I just looked it up. Booker and Middleton have both made exactly the same amount of All Star games at 3 a piece. Yet one is an "MVP" and the other a fringe all star. :oldlol: what a joke.

Um Devin Booker is 25 just barely entering his prime leading the best team in the league by a WIDE AF margin as the #1 option, putting up 28/7/5 on 52%/41%/93% since CP3's been injured giving him the green light to be the primary ballhandler. The Suns lead for the best record in the league has EXPANDED since CP3 got injured, and Cam Johnson, Jae Crowder, and Cam Payne and more have all missed multiple games in that time period as well. Booker also currently has the best defensive rating of any full time starting SG in the league, as well as the highest FG% in the clutch of any full time starting guard in the NBA period.

Kris Middleton is 30 and has never hit the 21 point average mark in his career despite playing next to the player who attracts attention from defenses arguably more than anybody else in the league.

You look like a clown right now for making that comparison.

[Shogon]

Anyone who legitimately thinks Devin Booker is the most valuable NBA player right now or truth be told even "close" to it, is an absolute ****ing retard. I understand he's a top 10 or top 15 player but he sure as shit isn't even "close" to #1.

The gap between 1 and 2 CAN be an extremely large gap. And there is clearly a massive massive ****ing gap between Booker and guys like Embiid, Giannis and Jokic.

[RogueBorg]

IDK if you're trolling or not but typically throughout history seeding has mattered a lot.

And it's mattered a lot because people are retarded.

Nobody can agree on what the word valuable means because they're too stupid to understand it really just means 'best.' It's the top individual award in the entire ****ing sport.

ANYTHING other than 'best' is just a complete misunderstanding of what the word valuable really even means at its root and a bunch of mental gymnastic goalpost moving bullshit.

The NBA should be ****ing ashamed of themselves for not renaming the award.


Let me clarify this for everyone on how this award SHOULD be interpreted, even though it clearly is not.

MOST valuable = BEST PLAYER = if you rearranged every player to every possible combination of players in the league and had them all play every single other combination of players in the league, including teams with clones of themselves, which singular player's teams under said exponential combination of players/teams would win the most games when comparing them to other singular players.

Who is the best player? That's it. Period.

Not who is the best 1 on 1 player. Not who is the most valuable to their particular team. Not who is the best player on a top seeded team. Not who is the best player on the best team. Not 'whatever bullshit goalpost moving narrative the media wants to come up with', either.

Ok? Who is the best player? The objective is to win. Who would yield the most wins regardless of circumstance of teammates, coaching, etc.

That's who the MVP ACTUALLY is regardless of who ends up winning the award in any given year. And this year it sure as shit is either Jokic, Embiid, or Giannis. I would not laugh at anyone that said Curry, Durant or Doncic. But I WOULD laugh at anyone that named a player outside of those 6.

I tend to agree with everything you said. What I've argued from the beginning is based on the criteria that the NBA voters have established, not what I've established, they set the rules, they have always placed value on stats and team success in winning the NBA MVP award.

[tontoz]

Embiid played 51 games out of 72, that's why.


Oh so things other than seeding actually matter? Wow I never thought you would concede that. :oldlol:

Curry also missed 9 games last year FYI.

Here are some other things that matter. Jokic leads the league in win shares, win shares per 48, BPM and VORP.

[RogueBorg]

Oh so things other than seeding actually matter? Wow I never thought you would concede that. :oldlol:

Curry also missed 9 games last year FYI.

Here are some other things that matter. Jokic leads the league in win shares, win shares per 48, BPM and VORP.

I don't know why this is so difficult for you, I've always said there is an aspect to winning in determining the MVP award. It's just a fact. I never once said it's the ONLY determining factor. Of course there has to be stats. But it's never been stats and stats alone. If you can't understand this I can't help you. Shogun's right, it should be best player period, but it's not.

[wagexslave]

Comparing Booker to Jokic is ban worthy. Its like comparing Dame Lilliard to prime Larry Bird. Booker can't elevate teammates like Bird or Jokic. He's a simple shooter scorer npc all star talent. Even prime Dame was actually better.

Where tf did I compare Booker to Jokic? I only used Booker as an example to show how little winning matters when it comes to the MVP award these days(a reward that historically was based on winning whether you liked it or not) since Booker is leading the best team in the league to potentially finish with one of the top 15 or top 10 all time records of all time, having 9 whole wins above the 2nd best team, and he's not even in the conversation for the award. Whether you think he should be in the convo or not wasn't the point, the fact remains that HISTORICALLY SPEAKING he would have most likely won or at least been in the convo due to sheer wins.

Maybe you should learn how to read before posting dumb ass replies. :blah

[RogueBorg]

Here are some other things that matter. Jokic leads the league in win shares, win shares per 48, BPM and VORP.

That matters. Here's the other side. Why is Denver behind Minnesota and Dallas?

[tontoz]

I don't know why this is so difficult for you, I've always said there is an aspect to winning in determining the MVP award. It's just a fact. I never once said it's the ONLY determining factor. Of course there has to be stats. But it's never been stats and stats alone. If you can't understand this I can't help you. Shogun's right, it should be best player period, but it's not.

So let me get this straight. Are you saying that Embiid missing 11 more games than Curry is enough to make up the difference between being the 1 seed and the.8 seed?

[tontoz]

That matters. Here's the other side. Why is Denver behind Minnesota and Dallas?

Dallas has a better record and Minny has.the tiebreaker over Denver. Not sure how this has any relevance to the discussion :oldlol:

[wagexslave]

Oh so things other than seeding actually matter? Wow I never thought you would concede that. :oldlol:

Curry also missed 9 games last year FYI.

Here are some other things that matter. Jokic leads the league in win shares, win shares per 48, BPM and VORP.

Jokic is a damn good player, nobody's saying he doesn't deserve to be "in the conversation" for it. Shit, I'm not even saying he didn't deserve it last year.

But let's be real are you taking him or Giannis for your playoff run?

[RogueBorg]

So let me get this straight. Are you saying that Embiid missing 11 more games than Curry is enough to make up the difference between being the 1 seed and the.8 seed?

Nope. Philadelphia was a better team than Golden State last year. If I had to guess, the voters probably knocked Embiid down some notches because Philadelphia still finished as the top seed despite Embiid missing all those games. Probably going to be the same knock Morant gets this year. Had Embiid played alot more games I think he gets more credit for the team's success.

[RogueBorg]

Dallas has a better record and Minny has.the tiebreaker over Denver. Not sure how this has any relevance to the discussion :oldlol:

If Jokic is so valuable, why does Dallas and Minnesota have better records?

[tontoz]

Jokic is a damn good player, nobody's saying he doesn't deserve to be "in the conversation" for it. Shit, I'm not even saying he didn't deserve it last year.

But let's be real are you taking him or Giannis for your playoff run?


Given their history in the playoffs I take Jokic easily. Giannis doesn't have the best playoff history.

Last season he was an inch away from another embarrassing series defeat to the shorthanded nets. His team closed out the Hawks without him.

Jokic has been a beast in the playoffs.

[RogueBorg]

But let's be real are you taking him or Giannis for your playoff run?

If you were asking me it would be Giannis.

[tontoz]

If Jokic is so valuable, why does Dallas and Minnesota have better records?



Because Denver's second option is Will Barton, and Minny doesn't have a better record they have a better seed. :facepalm

[RogueBorg]

Jokic has been a beast in the playoffs.

:roll: at this. Sure, if you ignore 2019-20 and before.

[tontoz]

:roll: at this. Sure, if you ignore 2019-20 and before.

You really are clueless. Jokic has averaged 26/11/6 for his career in the playoffs with a 60% TS.

His first year in the playoffs he was the.leader in playoff PER.

[RogueBorg]

You really are clueless. Jokic has averaged 26/11/6 for his career in the playoffs with a 60% TS.

You're right, I was looking at something else. My bad.

[wagexslave]

Given their history in the playoffs I take Jokic easily. Giannis doesn't have the best playoff history.

Last season he was an inch away from another embarrassing series defeat to the shorthanded nets. His team closed out the Hawks without him.

Jokic has been a beast in the playoffs.

Even after seeing Jokic getting limited by Ayton last year and swept by the Suns with little effort, while Giannis took his game to a whole new level against the Suns in the Finals and looked like Superman out there on both ends of the court including hitting his jumpers and FTs and even dropping 50 points in a closeout game?

Personally that changed things in my eyes. Giannis athleticism and ability to step his game up like that is more of a weapon to me than Jokic's passing. A team with good team defense can limit Jokic's passing effectiveness, but it's difficult to stop a nearly 7 foot freight train with insane speed and hops, especially in this era where defense has to be soft af while on offense he can bully into other players and create the contact yet get the blocking foul whistle.

And there's also the factor that the dude bent his knee backwards and yet somehow was jumping through the roof like a week later. The dude isn't human.

Idk I might have leaned towards Jokic before that but rn I just think Giannis is a much scarier weapon.

[RogueBorg]

It's Giannis' defensive abilities that win me over. Can we even talk about Jokic's defensive impact being positive?

[tontoz]

Even after seeing Jokic getting limited by Ayton last year and swept by the Suns with little effort, while Giannis took his game to a whole new level against the Suns in the Finals and looked like Superman out there on both ends of the court including hitting his jumpers and FTs and even dropping 50 points in a closeout game?

Personally that changed things in my eyes. Giannis athleticism and ability to step his game up like that is more of a weapon to me than Jokic's passing. A team with good team defense can limit Jokic's passing effectiveness, but it's difficult to stop a nearly 7 foot freight train with insane speed and hops, especially in this era where defense has to be soft af while on offense he can bully into other players and create the contact yet get the blocking foul whistle.

And there's also the factor that the dude bent his knee backwards and yet somehow was jumping through the roof like a week later. The dude isn't human.

Idk I might have leaned towards Jokic before that but rn I just think Giannis is a much scarier weapon.


How do you think Giannis would do with a starting back court of compazzo and Rivers?

Jokic actually won a series with those two as starters.

Aside from the finals Giannis has had a lot of struggles in the playoffs. He even shoots 10% worse from the foul line in the playoffs.

[tontoz]

It's Giannis' defensive abilities that win me over. Can we even talk about Jokic's defensive impact being positive?


How about leading the league in DBPM? That work for you?

[wagexslave]

It's Giannis' defensive abilities that win me over. Can we even talk about Jokic's defensive impact being positive?

No. Anyone who says yes is kidding themselves.

The only thing he has going for him on the defensive end is sheer size and strength. But his lack of athleticism really limits him to only being a good defender against other big slow guys. He's flat out un-switchable and any big with adequate speed is going to have a field day.

Giannis is the exact type of guy that Jokic never wants to play against in a playoff series in his life.

[wagexslave]

How about leading the league in DBPM? That work for you?

It's well known that DBPM overly favors good rebounders who can get a lot of assists.

[RogueBorg]

How about leading the league in DBPM? That work for you?

Surely you're not implying Jokic is the best defender in the NBA?

The problem with trying to measure defense is there is no "good for one good for all" way to measure defense.

If You Thought Playing NBA Defense Was Hard, Try Quantifying It

Nikola Jokic may be the MVP, but is he a good defender? The truth is, the numbers don’t really know. The analytics revolution has changed basketball, but everyone—armchair statheads, team quants, agents, general managers—still can’t quite figure out how to properly measure the defensive side of the ball.

You can read the rest of the article here https://www.theringer.com/nba/2021/5/11/22423517/nba-defense-analytics-nikola-jokic

[tontoz]

It's well known that DBPM overly favors good rebounders who can get a lot of assists.


Why would assists have relevance to defensive +/-?

On the Zach Lowe podcast recently they were talking about jokics defense. They said he never goes for pump fakes which forces guys to shoot a lot of floaters over him. He doesn't put them on the foul line or give them easy layups. His transition D has improved a lot after losing weight.





https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/g195/tontoz/Screenshot_20220321-130058.jpg

[tontoz]

Are you suggesting, based on that stat box, Jokic is the best defender in the league?


No I wouldn't say he is the best defender. I would say he is a positive on defense though which wasn't always the case.

Being able to use his size to contest shots inside without fouling has a lot of value, as does getting the rebound after a.miss.

[RogueBorg]

No I wouldn't say he is the best defender. I would say he is a positive on defense though which wasn't always the case.

Being able to use his size to contest shots inside without fouling has a lot of value, as does getting the rebound after a.miss.

K whew, had me scared for a second LOL

[tontoz]

K whew, had me scared for a second LOL

Defensive stats will always favor bigs because contesting shots at the rim and defensive rebounding are so important.

Only one guy is getting more defensive rebounds than Jokic and that's gobert who has multiple DPOYs.

[wagexslave]

Why would assists have relevance to defensive +/-?
Because it's just a stat that somebody made up who made the formula weighted to assume that big men got most of their assists because of defensive stops(for example getting a rebound then passing the ball up the court a guard).

"Assists are interesting. For guards, the BPM and OBPM coefficients are similar. For bigs, though, the offensive value of assists is less than the total value. Assists are a significant indicator of defensive skill for bigs."

https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/bpm2.html

[jayfan]

They go hand in hand do they not? Record is part of the seeding. Their record has them as the 7th seed, in the play-in tourny.

OKC was the 6 seed when Westbrook won it in '17.

So the precedence is there.

.

[tontoz]

Guess who has led the league in PER the last two years. It is a really tough call :oldlol:

[RogueBorg]

OKC was the 6 seed when Westbrook won it in '17.

So the precedence is there.

.

True, but the triple-double average was once thought impossible to do in today's game. It was one of those where they had to vote him the MVP. The triple-doubles value has really taken a tumble the last few years.

[wagexslave]

OKC was the 6 seed when Westbrook won it in '17.

So the precedence is there.

.

I guess you're right. But since then Westbrook has done nothing but prove that he's not a true MVP caliber player, even if the stats told us he was...

[AlternativeAcc.]

I guess you're right. But since then Westbrook has done nothing but prove that he's not a true MVP caliber player, even if the stats told us he was...

Whats the case against Jokic though?

You keep deflecting. Make a case against him. Who deserves it more and why.

[Axe]

Just don't tell me ja morant deserves it more. Lol.

[Spurs m8]

Westbrook AND Harden have won it...so its already a joke.

Another thing that today's game turned meaningless

[NBAGOAT]

You can actually prove how many games Denver would win like 20 games without jokic using impact stats. What some overlook is that Denver’s bench was trash for most of the year, campazzo was one of the worst players in the league.

Denver has one above average player in Gordon this year, I would give someone MVP consideration if someone lead this team to a .509 record and the play in let alone Denver’s record. In embiids defense, his team wasn’t good either pre-harden so he has a case. for Giannis Milwaukee has had a lot injuries but they don’t compare to Denver’s imo

[wagexslave]

Whats the case against Jokic though?

You keep deflecting. Make a case against him. Who deserves it more and why.

How have I deflected? I've made a case against him within this thread.

First off I don't believe that a 7th seed player should ever win MVP to begin with, that's just how I feel about it. I don't think it's good for the reward BECAUSE it's an award that historically rewards high seeding. Whether people liked that or not it's a fact that it did for most of the league's history. If 6th and now 7th seed can result in winning the MVP then why stop there? How about 8th seed? 9th seed? How about a 7th seed with a losing record? See what I mean? It's going to turn into a mess.

Also it opens the door for people to go skim through old MVP's and say "player X didn't deserve to win MVP that year, because player Y had better stats that season". Those debates are already annoying, we don't need to pour even more gasoline on that dumpster fire. Just keep the guidelines consistent. It's bad for the league when the stipulations to win an award keep changing randomly whenever the league feels like it.

Aside from all of that, in terms of him as a player specifically, I think his holes on the defensive end and his lack of athleticism are significant and tip the scales in favor of the players competing with him for the award. I believe his impact a bit overrated. Yes, him being a great passer is definitely a strong asset and it does make his team better and results in a lot of wins in the regular season. But I don't believe it will translate to championships personally unless he gets a LOT more help, especially defensively.

Advanced stats love him, sure, but as we've discussed in this thread some advanced stats aren't weighted evenly and some advanced stats like BPM can unfairly favor players who do things that aren't typical for their position such as big men getting assists. And there's just the good old fashioned eye test... I'm sorry but Jokic just straight up looks more impressive on paper than he does in the game to me. Those advanced metrics make him out to be like a top 15 all time great player, and I just can't say I see it. Maybe my opinion is skewed because I'm a Suns fan and Jokic looks way more pedestrian when guarded by Ayton.

[AlternativeAcc.]

How have I deflected? I've made a case against him within this thread.

First off I don't believe that a 7th seed player should ever win MVP to begin with, that's just how I feel about it. I don't think it's good for the reward BECAUSE it's an award that historically rewards high seeding. Whether people liked that or not it's a fact that it did for most of the league's history. If 6th and now 7th seed can result in winning the MVP then why stop there? How about 8th seed? 9th seed? How about a 7th seed with a losing record? See what I mean? It's going to turn into a mess.

Also it opens the door for people to go skim through old MVP's and say "player X didn't deserve to win MVP that year, because player Y had better stats that season". Those debates are already annoying, we don't need to pour even more gasoline on that dumpster fire. Just keep the guidelines consistent. It's bad for the league when the stipulations to win an award keep changing randomly whenever the league feels like it.

Aside from all of that, in terms of him as a player specifically, I think his holes on the defensive end and his lack of athleticism are significant and tip the scales in favor of the players competing with him for the award. I believe his impact a bit overrated. Yes, him being a great passer is definitely a strong asset and it does make his team better and results in a lot of wins in the regular season. But I don't believe it will translate to championships personally unless he gets a LOT more help, especially defensively.

Advanced stats love him, sure, but as we've discussed in this thread some advanced stats aren't weighted evenly and some advanced stats like BPM can unfairly favor players who do things that aren't typical for their position such as big men getting assists. And there's just the good old fashioned eye test... I'm sorry but Jokic just straight up looks more impressive on paper than he does in the game to me. Those advanced metrics make him out to be like a top 15 all time great player, and I just can't say I see it. Maybe my opinion is skewed because I'm a Suns fan and Jokic looks way more pedestrian when guarded by Ayton.

The reality is that the nuggets are 3.5 games back from the 4 seed and have a sizeable lead on the 8th seed. You're acting like they're a fringe playoff team because they happen to be sitting as the 7th seed in a stacked conference.

The reality is that the nuggets are within 3 games of the other contending players teams... without his 2nd AND third option while having by far the best stats.

You're willing to say he doesn't deserve it because of 'seeding' without looking at the context. You're literally blindly basing your entire argument off of seeding. That's unbelievably stupid and lazy.

Something else thats lazy is you saying jokic sucks at D when he's improved massively this season. He's actually pretty good. Constantly deflecting passes and has been really solid against the pick and roll. His defensive raptor is near the top in the league.

I think what it comes down to is you haven't watched much Jokic and you're basing it off seeding and narrative that he sucks at defense. Context destroys your arguments though.

[NBAGOAT]

How have I deflected? I've made a case against him within this thread.

First off I don't believe that a 7th seed player should ever win MVP to begin with, that's just how I feel about it. I don't think it's good for the reward BECAUSE it's an award that historically rewards high seeding. Whether people liked that or not it's a fact that it did for most of the league's history. If 6th and now 7th seed can result in winning the MVP then why stop there? How about 8th seed? 9th seed? How about a 7th seed with a losing record? See what I mean? It's going to turn into a mess.

Also it opens the door for people to go skim through old MVP's and say "player X didn't deserve to win MVP that year, because player Y had better stats that season". Those debates are already annoying, we don't need to pour even more gasoline on that dumpster fire. Just keep the guidelines consistent. It's bad for the league when the stipulations to win an award keep changing randomly whenever the league feels like it.

Aside from all of that, in terms of him as a player specifically, I think his holes on the defensive end and his lack of athleticism are significant and tip the scales in favor of the players competing with him for the award. I believe his impact a bit overrated. Yes, him being a great passer is definitely a strong asset and it does make his team better and results in a lot of wins in the regular season. But I don't believe it will translate to championships personally unless he gets a LOT more help, especially defensively.

Advanced stats love him, sure, but as we've discussed in this thread some advanced stats aren't weighted evenly and some advanced stats like BPM can unfairly favor players who do things that aren't typical for their position such as big men getting assists. And there's just the good old fashioned eye test... I'm sorry but Jokic just straight up looks more impressive on paper than he does in the game to me. Those advanced metrics make him out to be like a top 15 all time great player, and I just can't say I see it. Maybe my opinion is skewed because I'm a Suns fan and Jokic looks way more pedestrian when guarded by Ayton.

jokic's passing already makes him extremely impressive by the eye test. Other stats that dont use the box score have jokic as dominant too(the rapm family). He's also even better in the playoffs arguably, averages 26/11/6. Finally his help is coming when everyone is healthy. On paper jokic, murray, porter, gordon is good enough to win a title. Ayton does guard him well but that doesnt matter that much. He does have trouble defensively with good perimeter players but many good defensive centers do too. Not everyone can be bam or ayton.

[fourkicks44]

The reality is that the nuggets are 3.5 games back from the 4 seed and have a sizeable lead on the 8th seed. You're acting like they're a fringe playoff team because they happen to be sitting as the 7th seed in a stacked conference.

The reality is that the nuggets are within 3 games of the other contending players teams... without his 2nd AND third option while having by far the best stats.

You're willing to say he doesn't deserve it because of 'seeding' without looking at the context. You're literally blindly basing your entire argument off of seeding. That's unbelievably stupid and lazy.

Something else thats lazy is you saying jokic sucks at D when he's improved massively this season. He's actually pretty good. Constantly deflecting passes and has been really solid against the pick and roll. His defensive raptor is near the top in the league.

I think what it comes down to is you haven't watched much Jokic and you're basing it off seeding and narrative that he sucks at defense. Context destroys your arguments though.

I disagree with OP and Jokic is a legitimate and worthy MVP candidate however I don't think you understand the context.

Is the East not also a stacked conference?

Despite his improvements and competencies on D is Jokic the same level as a defender as Giannis or Embiid?

[AlternativeAcc.]

I disagree with OP and Jokic is a legitimate and worthy MVP candidate however I don't think you understand the context.

Is the East not also a stacked conference?

Despite his improvements and competencies on D is Jokic the same level as a defender as Giannis or Embiid?
No but he's not a liability on that end and he's better overall and more valuable to his team. His cast his much worse than those guys but has a similar record.

There's no argument against him.

[Mask the Embiid]

Don’t worry he won’t win it

[fourkicks44]

No but he's not a liability on that end and he's better overall and more valuable to his team. His cast his much worse than those guys but has a similar record.

There's no argument against him.

I would trade Tobias Harris for Will Barton in a heartbeat. Even if he was on the same money.

[FKAri]

Because they're not going to give the MVP to a player who won MVP last year whose team makes the play-in tournament this year. They're just not going to do it.

Doesn't make it right. I understand why they do that even if I don't agree wit it.

Ideally, a guy's teammates should have nothing to do with his individual value. Nor should his story matter. They should use whatever subjective criteria they want to factor in things like ability to work with a team and synergy. But it should go to the best player in the league. We already have an award for winning. It's an NBA championship.


I guess you're right. But since then Westbrook has done nothing but prove that he's not a true MVP caliber player, even if the stats told us he was...

Westbrook winning it was a failure from the perspective of awarding a winner or awarding the best player. It was just an award to celebrate an historic milestone. So it goes back to that shitty factor in winning: A good story.

[Baller789]

Why not just have an MVP and a Best Player of the Season award?

[tontoz]

The sixers just beat the heat without Embiid and Harden. :oldlol:

There is no comparison between the Denver and Philly supporting casts. Denver has won 2 games without Jokic, against Indy and Houston.

[fourkicks44]

The sixers just beat the heat without Embiid and Harden. :oldlol:

There is no comparison between the Denver and Philly supporting casts. Denver has won 2 games without Jokic, against Indy and Houston.

Only because of Tyrese Maxey. There is no other reason.

And yes he is better than anyone Jokic plays with. Including Murray and MPJr.

[wagexslave]

Why not just have an MVP and a Best Player of the Season award?

I wouldn't mind that but people would argue that it would de-value former MVPs.

Only way they could try to make it work is to go back and figure out all of the old "best players" from past seasons and give them the award as well, and lets be honest that's never going to happen.

[wagexslave]

The sixers just beat the heat without Embiid and Harden. :oldlol:

There is no comparison between the Denver and Philly supporting casts. Denver has won 2 games without Jokic, against Indy and Houston.

Vs Teams .500+:

Nuggets = 13 W 23 L
Sixers = 21 W 19 L

Is that not a factor? Yeah Philly's cast is better. But is Jokic REALLY raising his team's ceiling that much more than Embiid if he still has almost double the amount of losses vs good teams than wins?

[Baller789]

I wouldn't mind that but people would argue that it would de-value former MVPs.

Only way they could try to make it work is to go back and figure out all of the old "best players" from past seasons and give them the award as well, and lets be honest that's never going to happen.

Finals MVP's didn't exist before. That didn't stop them for creating the award, among others. The league needs to move forward.
Let those discussions be left to the fans.

[Gohan]

So I guess the fact that Jokic's been missing his two best teammates the entire season shouldn't be mentioned even once in the OP. Or that despite this, this is how the Nuggets stack up to the other MVP candidates teams as of this morning

Bucks: 44-27
76ers: 43-27
Nuggets: 42-30

Damn, what a joke it'd be if Jokic was MVP with only a marginally worse record. Forget the fact that if the Bucks or Sixers were in the West neither of them would even be a top 4 seed.

Thats not other players fault hes missing his two best teammates. This is not the feel sorry for me award

[tanibanana]

Somehow it’ll be weird if a Player will win MVP being outside of top-6 in their conference.

But somehow, who really deserves it..?
1. Embiid has almost the same stats as Jokic and almost same team record. But Jokic played with less.
2. Giannis can win it over Jokic. But as if the moment Jokic has better stats. But Giannis has the best argument.
3. Morant, DeRozan, Doncic all has no argument.

[Full Court]

Easy solution to this dilemma.

Give MVP to Morant.

[Gohan]

I bet you they didnt think about bulls winning 55 without jordan their BEST player. People saying jokic just want him to win because hes white. Yall some racist mofos im disappointed. I thought we could all get along. Now i see imma have to stick with mask the embiid and try to convert manny to come join us

[expansionera]

so?

Why would where the rest of the conference is at matter more than what Jokic is doing with his team?

Because there are players on teams with better records who (according to to the way the MVP has always been delegated) would make superior candidates, team success has always mattered when evaluating the MVP and it’s traditionally been given to a top two seed candidate.

Everyone forgets this for some reason when it comes to Jokic

[expansionera]

I bet you they didnt think about bulls winning 55 without jordan their BEST player. People saying jokic just want him to win because hes white. Yall some racist mofos im disappointed. I thought we could all get along. Now i see imma have to stick with mask the embiid and try to convert manny to come join us
Lol Phil Jackson talks about in his auto biography the media rushing past Frazier and Reed after a big game to interview Bill Bradley who was coming off the bench at the time. White sports fans (NBA/NFL particularly) are traditionally very weird but also make up most of the votes for media awards

[tontoz]

Vs Teams .500+:

Nuggets = 13 W 23 L
Sixers = 21 W 19 L

Is that not a factor? Yeah Philly's cast is better. But is Jokic REALLY raising his team's ceiling that much more than Embiid if he still has almost double the amount of losses vs good teams than wins?


Why would that even matter lol? It isn't about raising the ceiling it is about keeping them in the playoffs until the guys get back from injury. Obviously Denver isn't going to be a title contender without their 2nd and 3rd best players and a weak bench.

The real question is why Philly loses so often to teams they should beat.

[tontoz]

I bet you they didnt think about bulls winning 55 without jordan their BEST player. People saying jokic just want him to win because hes white. Yall some racist mofos im disappointed. I thought we could all get along. Now i see imma have to stick with mask the embiid and try to convert manny to come join us

Or maybe it's the fact that Jokic leads the league in PER, win shares, win shares per 48, BPM and VORP.

[jayfan]

I would trade Tobias Harris for Will Barton in a heartbeat. Even if he was on the same money.

Smart man. You're in the minority, though.

[Gohan]

Or maybe it's the fact that Jokic leads the league in PER, win shares, win shares per 48, BPM and VORP.

In other words white people stats. Jokic is overrated to hell

[tontoz]

In other words white people stats. Jokic is overrated to hell


What are black people stats? Free throw attempts? :roll:

[post]

In other words white people stats. Jokic is overrated to hell

they are all playing a white man's game what difference does it make

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Dr._James_Naismith.jpg

[RogueBorg]

What are black people stats? :roll:

steals

[AlternativeAcc.]

steals

You weren't old enough to know who John Stockton is

[RogueBorg]

You weren't old enough to know who John Stockton is

Want to bet?

[Norcaliblunt]

All individual awards for a team sport are dumb.

As a Suns fan you should be happy Booker or CP3 are not in the conversation for MVP. What exactly did those Nash MVP’s do? Absolutely nothing but cause endless debate and controversy.

[post]

so in addition to jokic leading in per/ws48/ws/bpm/vorp and real plus minus and leading by a mile in raptor he also leads in pipm/lebron stat which places him as the 14th best defender in the nba this year

https://www.bball-index.com/2021-22-lebron-data/

could he not be the best player in the league with all these numbers saying he is? yes but with each added stat that says he is the best the odds of him not being the best decrease

[Norcaliblunt]

You see that’s the thing. We need to get rid of “mvp” and just celebrate all the stat leaders.

[post]

so in addition to jokic leading in per/ws48/ws/bpm/vorp and real plus minus and leading by a mile in raptor he also leads in pipm/lebron stat which places him as the 14th best defender in the nba this year

https://www.bball-index.com/2021-22-lebron-data/

could he not be the best player in the league with all these numbers saying he is? yes but with each added stat that says he is the best the odds of him not being the best decrease

jokic leads in pie and fic and kwpa and epm too

[wagexslave]

https://i.ibb.co/BT0gVD0/20220322-192943.jpg

[post]

https://i.ibb.co/BT0gVD0/20220322-192943.jpg

https://i.imgflip.com/4e6qlk.jpg

[Axe]

I bet you they didnt think about bulls winning 55 without jordan their BEST player. People saying jokic just want him to win because hes white. Yall some racist mofos im disappointed. I thought we could all get along. Now i see imma have to stick with mask the embiid and try to convert manny to come join us
Calm down gohan. Even the mighty mister popo wouldn't want to hear it lol.

[post]

jokic with 30/14/6/3/2 on 9-15 fg 12-13 ft

denver moves back into the 6th seed

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FluidDeficientArmedcrab-size_restricted.gif

[plowking]

He is the best player in the league, second at worst to Giannis.

Him and Giannis should be the only ones in the running. Morant and Embiid missed too many games.

[wagexslave]

Jokic looked very pedestrian against Ayton yet again just as I mentioned he usually does in this thread.

He did score 28 points, 6 reb, 6 ast, and 3 stl for you box score watchers to claim he didn't have a bad game, yet anyone who actually watched the game knows he played like ass the majority of the game. He literally had 8 turnovers and the lowest +/- on his entire team tonight. And that +/- lived up to the eye test. His "awful supporting cast" straight up carried him pretty much the entire first 3 quarters of the game as he was doing nothing. He took 5 shots in the first quarter then only managed to get 1 single shot off the next 2 quarters combined. He was nearly nonexistent in the 2nd and 3rd quarters aside from a few superstar treatment ticky tack foul calls sending him to the FT line.

He did manage to hit 9 out of his 10 shots in the game, but while simultaneously getting burned giving up buckets left and right defensively, getting abused on switches, couldn't stop Ayton etc. And when Ayton was playing tight defense on him, he struggled to even create a shot. He finally drilled a few clutch buckets late in the 4th when it was too little too late and the Suns had already pulled away and were cruising to their win barely trying anymore.

But yeah... people wonder why I'm not THAT impressed with the Joker when he plays like this most of the times I see him play. I admit my opinion of him may be skewed due to me being a Suns fan. He almost never looks like an MVP when he's defended by Ayton especially ever since Ayton started really developing his defensive game. Meanwhile it didn't help his matters that Booker the "non MVP candidate" made him look like dogshit in comparison tonight, dropping 49/10/4/3/1 on 64% shooting with only 2 TO's and the highest +/- amongst both teams.

[post]

booker is not even clearly the best player on his team...maybe he'll make an all nba team one day

congrats though to booker for finally matching jokic's season high in points

perhaps next time jokic will shoot 10-10 instead of 9-10 against deandre chamberlain and wage slave will be happy

https://c.tenor.com/So6WScGX-Q4AAAAM/we-are.gif

[wagexslave]

booker is not even clearly the best player on his team...maybe he'll make an all nba team one day

congrats though to booker for finally matching jokic's season high in points

perhaps next time jokic will shoot 10-10 instead of 9-10 against deandre chamberlain and wage slave will be happy

https://c.tenor.com/So6WScGX-Q4AAAAM/we-are.gif

Someone is in denial lol. Jokic was ass tonight.

I guess he was impressive in a sense that it's not easy to score 9 of 10 shooting and yet still somehow have the biggest negative impact on your team for the game.

[wagexslave]

https://media3.giphy.com/media/xR1MZRiI4hJH4fGrG2/giphy.webp?cid=6c09b952468cbb7042bf560c99395388849 84fcccd930e1e&rid=giphy.webp&ct=g

This is y'all MVP? :lol

Booker ripped the MVP hype right out of Jokic's hands on that play then proceeded to get more MVP chants than him in his own arena. :roll: Embarassing.

How can anyone take Jokic seriously after this game? Dude is in a must-win situation to avoid the play-in.. playing against a Suns team that looked like they were barely even putting any effort, just coasting and conserving energy until the 4th quarter......Not mention they were on the 2nd night of a b2b, on the road playing in Jokic's own arena. All while having nothing to gain from winning aside from having fun.

So how does Jokic step up and perform? By dropping almost as many turnovers as shots taken, and putting up the lowest +/- on his entire team. Good shit !:bowdown: :applause:

[tontoz]

What a shocker that Denver, missing their 2nd and 3rd best players, loses to the team with the best record in the league. Never would have seen that coming.

So Booker scored 49 just coasting? Cool story bro.

[Akeem34TheDream]

Advanced stats definitely overrate do it all, triple double type of players. Guys like Harden, Luka, Lebron and Jokic are great floor raisers but that type of basketball kinda limits your teammates(expressing my inner 3ball). Also exerting so much energy on offense often leads to lack of effort on defense.

[wagexslave]

What a shocker that Denver, missing their 2nd and 3rd best players, loses to the team with the best record in the league. Never would have seen that coming.

So Booker scored 49 just coasting? Cool story bro.

You forgot the Nuggets were missing their MVP for most of the game too. :lol Dude was almost nonexistent for close to 3 straight quarters worth of game clock.

Btw injuries only make sense as an excuse for the loss itself. Yet the loss is the last thing I'm criticizing him for. Whats your excuse for the fact that this shorthanded Nuggets team somehow played their best ball when Mr MVP wasn't on the court? And yet they played their WORST ball when he was on it? What's your excuse for him turning the ball over EIGHT times and somehow managing to have a negative impact in a game where he shot the ball great(90%FG)? Lmao like how tf does that happen. And why was he struggling so bad to get involved in the offense the majority of the time Ayton was on him?

And yes the Suns were clearly coasting most of the game, it was obvious to anyone who watches them on a regular basis. Clearly you can't truly quantify "coasting" when it comes to offense(considering the fact that scoring comes easy if the team you're playing against isn't that good defensively) so when I say coasting I'm generally talking about defense. Both teams played bad defense in the game, but there's a difference... I'd estimate the Suns were putting at most a 50% effort in on defense until the 4th quarter, while the Nuggets defense simply isn't that great no matter how hard they try.

You can just tell the difference when the Suns are putting in a full effort or not. I saw Suns players legit jogging out on switches and pass backs giving up in the middle of plays, leaving guys wide open for 3's way more than usual, not fighting hard through the majority of screens like they usually do, giving up letting players blow by them with the lane wide open letting Denver players drive to the hoop with ease uncontested fairly regularly, etc. It was pretty obvious they were weren't putting in a full effort like they do when they play teams they view as a threat. Until the 4th quarter they switched from 50% effort to 100% and easily took over the game like they usually do when playing mediocre teams. If you've watched the Suns this season you'd know that they've been doing this all year. They don't blow teams out nearly as often as they could, they prefer just playing conservative and taking over when they need to, that's their version of load management. Of course it depends on the team they're playing though. The more they view that team as a threat, the more effort they put in for the first 3 quarters.

Like I said if you pay attention, it's pretty obvious. Just like it was obvious when they coasted their way to 4-0 in the Western Conference Semis last year against Jokic. And again Jokic's individual performance in that series wasn't exactly impressive either, so saying shit like "...but but Jamal Murray was out! :cry:" doesn't excuse the fact that Jokic, as an individual, should have played better if he's this incredible MVP player. Honest to god I was way more impressed with the way Paul George stepped up against us in the WCF. And do I even need to rehash how much more impressive Giannis was against the Suns than Jokic?

[Shogon]

Advanced stats definitely overrate do it all, triple double type of players. Guys like Harden, Luka, Lebron and Jokic are great floor raisers but that type of basketball kinda limits your teammates(expressing my inner 3ball). Also exerting so much energy on offense often leads to lack of effort on defense.

You're right. But I have to add to this...

This is precisely why I say what does the word "best" even really mean? It can't be defined. There is no such thing as "best." At least, nothing that will ever be provable until we can run real life simulations and see which "main player" wins the most number of games vs every combination of players in NBA history. And even then, is that really an answer?


To use ISH's two favorite names at the moment, tell me this... if LeBron James is a higher floor raiser than Jordan, and Jordan is a higher ceiling raiser than LeBron, who is really better? People will naturally say Jordan simply because the ceiling was raised and thus brought the most attention because it was easily the most eye catching and "sensational" if you will, but they ignore the fact that if the support system such as the lumber, brick & mortar(teammates) weren't right, that ceiling would never get raised in the first place.

So who is better?

There is no answer. Not knowable by humans, anyways.

I would rather have Jordan because LeBron has a whiny dog shit attitude which has only gotten worse with each passing season, especially in his twilight years. But nevertheless...

You can't tell me that Jordan is taking a cast of mediocre players to 60 wins. Would never happen even at his peak... much in the same way that a LeBron led team of equal talent to the 96 Bulls outside of Jordan isn't going to win 72 games. The 2015 and 2016 Cavs were probably the two best rosters LeBron ever had... and they didn't come close to 72 wins.

[tontoz]

Devin Booker felt disrespected by Nuggets showing wrong picture for intro

But the Denver Nuggets tried a new trick on Thursday night by showing a photo of Los Angeles Clippers’ Amir Coffey on the video board when Booker was up during starting lineup announcements.

Whether it was an honest mistake or an actual ploy to get Booker off his game, it certainly didn’t work. He finished with a season-high 49 points — the most by a Sun since Jamal Crawford dropped 51 back in 2019.





https://arizonasports.com/story/3083417/devin-booker-felt-disrespected-by-nuggets-showing-wrong-picture-for-intro/


:lol

Pretty sure Booker wasn't "coasting".

Sure Jokic had too many turnovers but scoring 28 pts with an 89% TS is pretty good lol. Being -15 in a 10 point loss isn't exactly out of line. Hyland went off for 23 in 25 minutes off the bench. Big deal.

[GimmeThat]

This is precisely why I say what does the word "best" even really mean? It can't be defined. There is no such thing as "best."

the best person by definition is the person projected to live the longest. however the idea that a single person could live longer than the rest of humanity also argues that the person had contributed more to animals/trees than humanity.

[RogueBorg]

You're right. But I have to add to this...

This is precisely why I say what does the word "best" even really mean? It can't be defined. There is no such thing as "best." At least, nothing that will ever be provable until we can run real life simulations and see which "main player" wins the most number of games vs every combination of players in NBA history. And even then, is that really an answer?


To use ISH's two favorite names at the moment, tell me this... if LeBron James is a higher floor raiser than Jordan, and Jordan is a higher ceiling raiser than LeBron, who is really better? People will naturally say Jordan simply because the ceiling was raised and thus brought the most attention because it was easily the most eye catching and "sensational" if you will, but they ignore the fact that if the support system such as the lumber, brick & mortar(teammates) weren't right, that ceiling would never get raised in the first place.

So who is better?

There is no answer. Not knowable by humans, anyways.

I would rather have Jordan because LeBron has a whiny dog shit attitude which has only gotten worse with each passing season, especially in his twilight years. But nevertheless...

You can't tell me that Jordan is taking a cast of mediocre players to 60 wins. Would never happen even at his peak... much in the same way that a LeBron led team of equal talent to the 96 Bulls outside of Jordan isn't going to win 72 games. The 2015 and 2016 Cavs were probably the two best rosters LeBron ever had... and they didn't come close to 72 wins.

Of course no one "knows" the answer, we debate for the fun of it. Opinions are like butt-holes, everyone has one, and they think everyone elses stinks.

[Akeem34TheDream]

You're right. But I have to add to this...

This is precisely why I say what does the word "best" even really mean? It can't be defined. There is no such thing as "best." At least, nothing that will ever be provable until we can run real life simulations and see which "main player" wins the most number of games vs every combination of players in NBA history. And even then, is that really an answer?


To use ISH's two favorite names at the moment, tell me this... if LeBron James is a higher floor raiser than Jordan, and Jordan is a higher ceiling raiser than LeBron, who is really better? People will naturally say Jordan simply because the ceiling was raised and thus brought the most attention because it was easily the most eye catching and "sensational" if you will, but they ignore the fact that if the support system such as the lumber, brick & mortar(teammates) weren't right, that ceiling would never get raised in the first place.

So who is better?

There is no answer. Not knowable by humans, anyways.

I would rather have Jordan because LeBron has a whiny dog shit attitude which has only gotten worse with each passing season, especially in his twilight years. But nevertheless...

You can't tell me that Jordan is taking a cast of mediocre players to 60 wins. Would never happen even at his peak... much in the same way that a LeBron led team of equal talent to the 96 Bulls outside of Jordan isn't going to win 72 games. The 2015 and 2016 Cavs were probably the two best rosters LeBron ever had... and they didn't come close to 72 wins.

I agree completely. Also subjectivity of this game also makes it better imo. Sure some retards might dedicate their lives to argue who is better but it would be boring if everything was clear and all the necessary data could be obtained by stats.

[wagexslave]

https://arizonasports.com/story/3083417/devin-booker-felt-disrespected-by-nuggets-showing-wrong-picture-for-intro/


:lol

Pretty sure Booker wasn't "coasting".

Sure Jokic had too many turnovers but scoring 28 pts with an 89% TS is pretty good lol. Being -15 in a 10 point loss isn't exactly out of line. Hyland went off for 23 in 25 minutes off the bench. Big deal.

I mean you can believe what you want. Obviously Booker wasn't coasting offensively, but like I said I don't use the word coasting to describe offense because that's not even something you can quantify without the context of the other team's defense. Not to mention describing coasting on offense would be way to subjective. Like if Steph chucks a bunch of 3's from deep is he coasting on offense? Even though he usually makes them? See what I mean? While coasting on defense is pretty cut and dry... you can see when someone's not running as fast as usual. You can see them give up on plays and give up free buckets etc.

Sure 28 points with 89% TS looks good on a sheet of paper. But did you watch the game? Just curious. And having the worst +/- on your team when you're supposedly the MVP who's being held back by awful teammates does seem pretty out of line to me but what do I know.

The thing is I'm not arguing that the guy isn't a good player. He's a damn good player, clearly. Anyone who actually thinks he's not a good player is in denial. And yeah, even if he had a bad game last night especially for his usual standards, there was still some bright spots in it. He got a couple steals. That was honestly the most impressive part for me. Never seen Jokic get multiple steals in a game before. So I give him credit for that part, he is a bit better on defense than he used to be.

But aside from that, pretty bad game for him. Definitely not a game that would draw your eyes to him and make you think "that dude deserves MVP". Which is my whole point... he's been having a lot of games like this against my team. And I'm not about to sit and watch the Nuggets play every single week, they're not that interesting of a team outside of Joker. So a lot of the times I see the Nugs play is when they're playing against my team, which he just happens to struggle against more than most. So can you put yourself in my shoes and see why my opinion on him is a bit lower than a lot of other people?

I mean I've admitted multiple times in this thread that my opinion of him could be skewed due to that. Maybe my opinion would be higher if I watched every single Nugs game. That could be a possibility, I'm not ignorant enough to dismiss that as a possibility. I'll try to catch a few more Nugs games, and definitely make sure to watch them in the playoffs, and maybe I'll re-visit this thread and eat crow if he proves me wrong by impressing me with his performance.

[tontoz]

I mean you can believe what you want. Obviously Booker wasn't coasting offensively, but like I said I don't use the word coasting to describe offense because that's not even something you can quantify without the context of the other team's defense. Not to mention describing coasting on offense would be way to subjective. Like if Steph chucks a bunch of 3's from deep is he coasting on offense? Even though he usually makes them? See what I mean? While coasting on defense is pretty cut and dry... you can see when someone's not running as fast as usual. You can see them give up on plays and give up free buckets etc.

Sure 28 points with 89% TS looks good on a sheet of paper. But did you watch the game? Just curious. And having the worst +/- on your team when you're supposedly the MVP who's being held back by awful teammates does seem pretty out of line to me but what do I know.

The thing is I'm not arguing that the guy isn't a good player. He's a damn good player, clearly. Anyone who actually thinks he's not a good player is in denial. And yeah, even if he had a bad game last night especially for his usual standards, there was still some bright spots in it. He got a couple steals. That was honestly the most impressive part for me. Never seen Jokic get multiple steals in a game before. So I give him credit for that part, he is a bit better on defense than he used to be.

But aside from that, pretty bad game for him. Definitely not a game that would draw your eyes to him and make you think "that dude deserves MVP". Which is my whole point... he's been having a lot of games like this against my team. And I'm not about to sit and watch the Nuggets play every single week, they're not that interesting of a team outside of Joker. So a lot of the times I see the Nugs play is when they're playing against my team, which he just happens to struggle against more than most. So can you put yourself in my shoes and see why my opinion on him is a bit lower than a lot of other people?

I mean I've admitted multiple times in this thread that my opinion of him could be skewed due to that. Maybe my opinion would be higher if I watched every single Nugs game. That could be a possibility, I'm not ignorant enough to dismiss that as a possibility. I'll try to catch a few more Nugs games, and definitely make sure to watch them in the playoffs, and maybe I'll re-visit this thread and eat crow if he proves me wrong by impressing me with his performance.



So your whole point is based on games when Denver is playing short handed against the team with the best record in the league? Do you really not see the problem here?

He has played against you guys only twice all season. FYI he was +28 against you guys on opening night.

[wagexslave]

So your whole point is based on games when Denver is playing short handed against the team with the best record in the league? Do you really not see the problem here?

He has played against you guys only twice all season. FYI he was +28 against you guys on opening night.


My opinion on him was formed across multiple seasons. This season's 2 games have done little to change my opinion on him. If anything last night's game was a good opportunity to help change it but instead it reinforced it. He used to kill us all of the time, I used to be really high on him before the Suns got good(and don't get me wrong, I still do respect his game as one of the top players in the league even if this thread makes it seem like otherwise). But things started slowly changing once we started to get good. The improvement of our team defense, and especially once Ayton's defensive game kept improving... it was like "ok now we have a good big man in Ayton who could match his size, strength, and footwork but with more athleticism". Not to say that Ayton instantly became a great Jokic defender, but he had the perfect tools to become one.

From there on every time we played each other, it started feeling like whatever stats Jokic put up mattered less. Even before Ayton started getting good at limiting his numbers, if Jokic managed to have a good game with stupid high numbers, it's not like they were going to blow us out like the old days. The impact of those numbers just weren't as much anymore, because we now had the offensive players to run switches and shit on him and exploit his lack of speed and athleticism. It was to the point where I was going into games debating if I was more nervous about Jamal Murray than Jokic. Because the impact felt from Jamal Murray's athleticism and increasingly superior defense was definitely noticeable against us, especially in an intense game in the 4th quarter.

A perfect example, last season there was a game, when CP3 was still new to the team and the Suns didn't have their mojo yet(when they started 8-8 before going on to finish 1 game below the best record), where Jokic AND Murray both went off for crazy numbers, and Booker didn't even play that game.... and yet the Suns still almost won in regulation if not for a buzzer beater Jamal Murray 3 to tie the game and send it to OT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n1b5v6lpTM). Once Ayton fouled out in OT Jokic really started abusing us. But Ayton's defense hadn't been that great in the season yet anyways, Jokic had some sexy numbers and we still almost won without Book. And it turned out that the Murray 3 pointer was BS because he traveled on the play, so we SHOULD have won. But regardless it didn't change the fact the refs counted the bucket and it was Murray that ultimately bailed them out.

The western conference semis were what really made me question how much I "fear" facing him compared to other superstars. Not because we swept them while the Murray wasn't playing, but because of how little of an impact he seemed to have regardless of our sweep. IIRC Murray was the only major player out for them, yet it felt like the Suns were barely even trying just like last night... like Jokic could do almost nothing to stop the onslaught. First off, I don't think running your offense through a point center is nearly as effective in a 7 game series where you can game plan against it. Especially against contenders that have good coaching and play good defense. And I've never seen CP3 feast on switches so much in my life as he did in that series. There was a point in time where the Nugs finally took out Jokic and put Javale McGee in the game for the first time.... and yet they somehow looked better. It was like the guards didn't have to force themselves to run their offense through a big, and Javale's athleticism and rim protection was actually giving us some issues. Not implying that McGee is anywhere near as good as Jokic obviously, but holy f*ck was he underutilized in that series. Putting him in gave Denver a different dynamic that we didn't plan for and it kinda worked, but they refused to continue using him. Thank god, it allowed us to recruit him which has been a steal.

Yes, Jokic is an amazing floor raiser but is he really that much of a ceiling raiser? Is he going to will a series against a top defensive contender for a chip? Will parts of his game ever not be exploitable in a 7 game series? I'm just not sure. But one thing I can say for sure is that he just doesn't strike fear of facing him in the playoffs like other MVP's such as Giannis who we saw somehow damn near eliminate his shortcomings for an entire NBA Finals against us. Healthy/prime KD, prime Bron, prime Kobe, etc all scared me more. etc...

Maybe he'll prove me wrong though. If he does, I will be the first do admit I was wrong about him.

And btw as far as this season's opening night game goes, the Suns started 1-3 on the season and were shaking off rust so that should tell you how much weight us Suns fans put into that string of games. Also it's not like I never watch games with Denver outside of when they play vs my Suns. Just not on a regular basis. I usually catch 1-2 a month at least. But there's no consistency to it. If the Suns aren't playing and I want to switch on a game I just turn on whatever close game is on at the moment. I should at least watch more game highlights on Youtube though, but highlights just aren't the same as actually watching a full game...

[tontoz]

IIRC Murray was the only major player out for them,

LOL their starting backcourt was Compazzo/Rivers. Not only was Murray out but so was their starting pg Barton. They picked Rivers up midseason off waivers and were forced to start him.

The fact that they were able to win a playoff series without their starting backcourt is a credit to them. Not surprising that they would struggle against a top seeded team that was healthy.

[post]

must be nice having a goat tier pg like cp3

imagine if instead of zero all star murray or career backups jokic had doncic at pg

perhaps that's ultimately why porzingis was traded since joker is ufa after next year

scary thought

https://c.tenor.com/H0VwOnMAU-sAAAAC/worried-omg.gif

[wagexslave]

LOL their starting backcourt was Compazzo/Rivers. Not only was Murray out but so was their starting pg Barton. They picked Rivers up midseason off waivers and were forced to start him.

The fact that they were able to win a playoff series without their starting backcourt is a credit to them. Not surprising that they would struggle against a top seeded team that was healthy.

What are you talking about? Will Barton might've missed round 1 but he played in the series against us.

[wagexslave]

must be nice having a goat tier pg like cp3

imagine if instead of zero all star murray or career backups jokic had doncic at pg

perhaps that's ultimately why porzingis was traded since joker is ufa after next year

scary thought

https://c.tenor.com/H0VwOnMAU-sAAAAC/worried-omg.gif

lol Speaking of Luka, if there's 1 other superstar that the Suns have owned way more than Jokic, it's him. Of course they're both Euros and both of their names end in the letter C which is kind of weird. I guess they're perfect for each other.

[tontoz]

What are you talking about? Will Barton might've missed round 1 but he played in the series against us.


I only watched Game 1 which he didn't play :lol

He played only 15 minutes off the bench in game 2 when the other starters besides Jokic wet the bed.

Compazo 1-7
MPJ 3-13
Rivers 2-5
Gordon 3-7

Off the bench key sub Morris was 1-7

Jokic was 9-17 for 24/13/6 but lets blame him for the loss. :rolleyes:

[AlternativeAcc.]

They lost to the 1 seed and jokic only dropped 28/6/6! Can't be MVP!!!


Op are you actually retarded?

[tontoz]

They lost to the 1 seed and jokic only dropped 28/6/6! Can't be MVP!!!


Op are you actually retarded?


Don't know about that but i do know he's taken a page out of 3balls book with some of his tldr posts.

[Gohan]

Iverson>fat boy spine hitter

[post]

joker doing joker things

35/12/8/2/2 13-15 fg 9-10 ft

https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-12-2016/R4GiC_.gif

[AlternativeAcc.]

joker doing joker things

35/12/8/2/2 13-15 fg 9-10 ft

https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-12-2016/R4GiC_.gif

****ing monster.

Back2back.

:applause:

[post]

this pass and missed layup sums up the year


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWoov_OwoaE

[post]

mvp going by raptor war

2022 jokic
2021 jokic
2020 harden
2019 harden
2018 harden
2017 curry
2016 curry
2015 curry
2014 durant

http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Is-This-Not-a-Reasonable-Place-To-Park-In-Fear-and-Loathing-In-Las-Vegas.gif

[wagexslave]

I only watched Game 1 which he didn't play :lol

He played only 15 minutes off the bench in game 2 when the other starters besides Jokic wet the bed.

Compazo 1-7
MPJ 3-13
Rivers 2-5
Gordon 3-7

Off the bench key sub Morris was 1-7

Jokic was 9-17 for 24/13/6 but lets blame him for the loss. :rolleyes:

All I see is a bunch of excuses. And I told you, it really it was just Murray who was the only noteworthy player missing in the series, except Barton missed 1 whole damn game whoop de do. That's plenty of time for Jokic to utilize him and get a win.


That's the part I just don't understand. If Jokic is SOOOOOO damn good, then why couldn't he have at least led his team to steal one single win against the Suns? You mean to tell me Jokic couldn't get enough help to win 1 game? Not like he was playing with complete scrubs. He was playing with Michael "Max Contract" Porter Jr? As well as a $20m/year "luxury role player" tier Aaron Gordon? Will Barton who's at least a decent starter. Javale McGee who has been easily the best player the Suns acquired this season. Rivers, JaMychael Green, etc.

Ever considered that maybe there's an ounce of truth in my theory and Jokic's play style when facing great defensive teams, especially in a 7 game series where you can gameplan for him, is just not all that impactful.... At no point in the series was I worried about Jokic, aside from when he got anger issues and clubbed Cam Payne in the face with his big ass hand. Poor Cam Payne didn't deserve it.

But you got guys like KD, who didn't win MVP last year, yet he managed to single handedly will his team to a win in game 5 against the (eventual) champion Bucks. And KD was getting 0 help from his whole damn team outside of literal Jeff Green(who's playing with Jokic now, coincidentally)... Harden tried his hardest to choke that game for KD but KD wasn't having it and still got the win on 49pt, 17rb, 10ast. Jokic has never even had a playoff game as good as that, let alone against a defensive juggernaut team like the Bucks.


Speaking of the Bucks... look at what Giannis did in the Finals, against the Suns AKA team that swept Jokic, in a closeout game 6, in a game where even Giannis best teammates were playing mediocre barely helping him most of the game... 50 points, 14 pts, 5 steals, 64% FG to secure the chip. You can't blame it all on Joker's teammates when Giannis/KD's teammates played just as bad in these games.

[AlternativeAcc.]

All I see is a bunch of excuses. And I told you, it really it was just Murray who was the only noteworthy player missing in the series, except Barton missed 1 whole damn game whoop de do. That's plenty of time for Jokic to utilize him and get a win.


That's the part I just don't understand. If Jokic is SOOOOOO damn good, then why couldn't he have at least led his team to steal one single win against the Suns? You mean to tell me Jokic couldn't get enough help to win 1 game? Not like he was playing with complete scrubs. He was playing with Michael "Max Contract" Porter Jr? As well as a $20m/year "luxury role player" tier Aaron Gordon? Will Barton who's at least a decent starter. Javale McGee who has been easily the best player the Suns acquired this season. Rivers, JaMychael Green, etc.

Ever considered that maybe there's an ounce of truth in my theory and Jokic's play style when facing great defensive teams, especially in a 7 game series where you can gameplan for him, is just not all that impactful.... At no point in the series was I worried about Jokic, aside from when he got anger issues and clubbed Cam Payne in the face with his big ass hand. Poor Cam Payne didn't deserve it.

But you got guys like KD, who didn't win MVP last year, yet he managed to single handedly will his team to a win in game 5 against the (eventual) champion Bucks. And KD was getting 0 help from his whole damn team outside of literal Jeff Green(who's playing with Jokic now, coincidentally)... Harden tried his hardest to choke that game for KD but KD wasn't having it and still got the win on 49pt, 17rb, 10ast. Jokic has never even had a playoff game as good as that, let alone against a defensive juggernaut team like the Bucks.


Speaking of the Bucks... look at what Giannis did in the Finals, against the Suns AKA team that swept Jokic, in a closeout game 6, in a game where even Giannis best teammates were playing mediocre barely helping him most of the game... 50 points, 14 pts, 5 steals, 64% FG to secure the chip. You can't blame it all on Joker's teammates when Giannis/KD's teammates played just as bad in these games.
It's a regular season award.


Thanks for the playoff recap.

[ZionDunks]

Should go to Tatum

[wagexslave]

It's a regular season award.


Thanks for the playoff recap.

Were you the person I was replying to? Didn't think so. There's a context as to why we're talking about the playoffs from earlier in this thread. Because the playoffs are where your how big your impact really shows, especially offensive impact vs opponent defensive impact and vice versa.

Btw last I checked it's an award that's been overwhelmingly been based on who's dominant in the win category more than any other stat, but you can continue to pretend otherwise if you want.

[tontoz]

The Suns were better than Denver last year and again year. The better team typically wins, especially when the weaker team is short handed.

And of course an MVP award is determined by the entire season, not a handful of games against a better team over consecutive seasons.
:facepalm

[AlternativeAcc.]

Were you the person I was replying to? Didn't think so. There's a context as to why we're talking about the playoffs from earlier in this thread. Because the playoffs are where your how big your impact really shows, especially offensive impact vs opponent defensive impact and vice versa.

Btw last I checked it's an award that's been overwhelmingly been based on who's dominant in the win category more than any other stat, but you can continue to pretend otherwise if you want.
Ok but using your logic who is more deserving? Jokic, Embed, and Giannis have almost the same amount of wins.

a 2-3 win difference is enough for you to say Jokic winning is a joke when he doesn't have his 2nd, 3rd option all season? While dominating statistically? You're making the argument for Jokic and you don't even know it. :roll:

[wagexslave]

Ok but using your logic who is more deserving? Jokic, Embed, and Giannis have almost the same amount of wins.

a 2-3 win difference is enough for you to say Jokic winning is a joke when he doesn't have his 2nd, 3rd option all season? While dominating statistically? You're making the argument for Jokic and you don't even know it. :roll:

The main reason I made this thread wasn't to shit on Jokic specifically as a player btw. It was mainly because Jokic was a 7th seed at the time. I honestly feel that being at MINIMUM top 3 seed should be part of the criteria necessary for stats to win it. If he never dropped to 7th, I would have never bothered making the thread. And even then I get that it's not that simple. But I don't care, this whole 6th seed MVP BS that started with Westbick needs to stop. All it does is slap former MVP candidates in the face who didn't make the cut back in the day because they were 6th seed. It also just looks goofy and cheapens the motivation to win in the regular season even more.

But in this thread, I revealed that I felt Jokic's impact was a bit overrated, and that led to people calling me out on my opinion. Which is fine, I respect everyone has a different opinion, you don't have to agree with mine. But the thread has turned into a "me trying to explain why I feel Jokic's impact isn't as crazy as it looks on paper" thread basically. And I regret it, because it's actually really damn difficult to try to "disprove" someone's numbers with words and context. It takes way too much typing to try to explain my thought process and to reference specific games and shit, especially when people just excuse Jokic's downfalls anyways... so why bother. I'm ready to be done making arguments against Jokic in this thread, consider this my last major one. If anyone just opened the thread wants to go skim through the arguments I've already made, feel free to tell me whether you agree with any points I attempted to make, or if think I'm 1 IQ brain dead... I don't mind. :oldlol: I'm just going to keep watching more Jokic and see if he changes my mind or not. I don't doubt that he might. Wouldn't be the first time I had to admit I was wrong about a player, won't be the last.



Anyways, none of that explained who my vote is behind now... When I first started this thread I was originally leaning towards Embiid over Giannis mainly because I couldn't decide between them statistically or defensively this season, so I figured might as well give it to the player who hasn't won one yet in Embiid. BUT I've changed my mind on all of them now.


...It's simple. The more I look into a lot of past MVP records and think about them one after another... there's 1 thing that shits on all 3 of their claims. It's called wins. The MVP has always been a very win-weighted award, so why is it that Booker shouldn't win it if he's leading the Suns to winning potentially up to 68 wins this season? Having a historic-level season with a monumental lead over the rest... that simply can't be ignored. And looking at a lot of old MVPs, Bookers stats are just as good or better better than plenty of them. So that's not a good excuse either. He meets the criteria in both stats AND wins, unlike all 3 of Jokic, Embiid, and Giannis.

Those 3 guys are all a MINIMUM of like 13 wins behind the Suns. Pretty sure all 3 of them are closer to .500 than they are to the Suns. And yet the Suns have been doing this with a ton of injuries. Not to mention the amount of disrespect people showed to Book when CP3 got injured, people acting like the Suns were going to suck ass the rest of the year without CP3 and drop seeds. Yet they INCREASED their lead for the #1 record under Book's leadership to 9 wins with CP3 out. So why SHOULDN'T D Book win the award? Seems like people just never want to give him credit. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the same people who tried to discredit his stats back in the day because he was on a bad team, are the same exact people who are trying to discredit his wins now because he's on a good team... like wtf lol. Can't win either way.

I read something about there being 12 players who finished with the #1 record in the league with individual stats extremely similar to Books, and supposedly ALL 12 won the MVP award. If that's the criteria, then it simply wouldn't be fair to Book to suddenly discredit a claim that strong. Especially when his final win record might be better than most or all of those 12 dudes, and after dealing with more adversity.

[AlternativeAcc.]

:roll:

So Devin booker is the MVP. Its settled.


Honestly, in most years Booker might have a decent case. But to pretend his production and impact is anywhere near Jokic is laughable.

You're making the argument that the MVP should solely go to the guy with the best stats on the most talented/stacked team.

The MVP would actually be a joke in that scenario. Booker isn't anywhere near being the most valuable player in the league and you know this. Stop it man.

[Norcaliblunt]

Giannis is better than Jokic and Embed.

[wagexslave]

:roll:

So Devin booker is the MVP. Its settled.


Honestly, in most years Booker might have a decent case. But to pretend his production and impact is anywhere near Jokic is laughable.

You're making the argument that the MVP should solely go to the guy with the best stats on the most talented/stacked team.

The MVP would actually be a joke in that scenario. Booker isn't anywhere near being the most valuable player in the league and you know this. Stop it man.
I'm not saying it should 100% guaranteed go to the top player of the top team every year. My argument is that there should be some real criteria guidelines stated by the league itself. Under my system, yes, it would prioritize the most wins. But I don't see why that's an outlandish idea considering that historically the award already did most seasons.

With this system stats would still have the ability to make up the difference and win out against the top player on the top team. But the player with the better stats should at least be pretty damn close to #1 seed in wins. And they couldn't be any lower than 3rd seed of each conference. And in a season like this where the #2 and #3 team of the league aren't even in the same stratosphere as the #1 team in wins, it would be very difficult for the best player on the #1 team to lose. If it's someone like Book who doesn't have ridiculous eye popping stats, but still has damn good stats that still match many #1 seed MVP winners in the past, then Book would be pretty safe to win it unless the stats of the other guy was some truly next level never been done before type shit.

This simplifies the selection process in my eyes. If you want a shot at winning MVP without the #1 record, then bust your ass harder all season and get a top 3 seed, then let your stats do the talking from there. If you can't even get that done, then why should anyone care so much about your superior stats if you went into the season knowing that top 3 seed was a guideline to qualify and you were unable to get it done. That's the way I look at it. You can argue that "the best player isn't always going to win then"... but MVP hasn't been the "best player award" most years, so why should it be now? There's gotta be some compromise no matter what. Not everyone is going to settle on the same system. But at least this system would take multiple things into account and not JUST wins.

Also, while we're on the topic of Booker I just want to point out that he could easily average more eye catching number if he wanted/needed to. Do you believe that a guy who already averages 26.5ppg/5apg/5rpg on the highest Points-Per-Touch in the league couldn't reach 30+ PPG if he simply got more touches? We've already seen that when CP3 is out Book gets more touches and he easily produces with them. His ppg and apg start going up fast. He's definitely capable of carrying a bigger load, but he just doesn't need to. I like him where he is rn, not having to over-do things. He can conserve his energy until the 4th we are the best team in the league with a big reason why being the fact that Booker has been the best shooter in the clutch among guards all season.

This Suns system is all about team-wide ball movement getting everyone touches. Book gets damn near close to half the touches of Jokic. Jokic IS his teams offense, it's their game plan to run everything through him, for better or for worse. He gets more touches by a wide margin than anyone else in the NBA. So it's like.. So if we're talking context, I think you gotta use that as context. Is it dope as f*ck that he's able to run that offense effectively, especially as a big? Of course. But it's just something for you to consider when evaluating Booker, there's so many mouths to feed on the Suns yet Book is still putting up great numbers on limited touches. Not claiming that makes him better or even as good as Jokic, but maybe it will shine what he's doing in a new light for you a bit.

[Nanners]

So far in 2022 Jokic is putting up the best single season PER of any player in NBA history... better than absurd seasons like 1962 Wilt.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/highest-nba-player-efficiency-rating-single-season

Not saying that this stat justifies MVP status, but he def wouldnt be the worst MVP winner of all time

[Nanners]

The idea that Devin Booker is MVP is beyond laughable. Jokic, Embiid and Giannis are all elite players that carry their teams on a near nightly basis, meanwhile Booker is just a talented scorer who happens to play for the best team in the league... if Booker was traded for someone like Demar Derozan or Zach Levine, the suns would be just as successful.

[tontoz]

So far in 2022 Jokic is putting up the best single season PER of any player in NBA history... better than absurd seasons like 1962 Wilt.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/highest-nba-player-efficiency-rating-single-season

Not saying that this stat justifies MVP status, but he def wouldnt be the worst MVP winner of all time


But...but...but....his seeding.

:facepalm

[FultzNationRISE]

Dude's leading his team to a play-in spot. Since when did #7 seeds start getting MVP consideration? Sure his stats on paper are great, but I'm supposed to take the MVP award seriously when you can win it with the #7 seed? We all know he's trash on defense too which is half the game.

Since when did wins not matter in general? It used to go to the best player on the best team(or at least close to best). Sh*t the Suns are literally 9 games above the #2 team in the league, still winning hella games despite multiple starters+6th man out(including CP3), and Booker isn't even in the CONVERSATION for MVP. And the Suns swept Jokic effortlessly last year, where did that MVP award get him?

They better AT LEAST give it to someone on a top 3 seed. Give it to Giannis or Embiid and I'll be fine with that. They've got the stats, the defense, and are at least closer to the top seed than Jokic.

:roll:


This is a very poor take on the concept of MVP.

[WADE MONEY]

2022: Embiid is better than Jokic.

2023: Embiid is literally Kwame Brown

[ArbitraryWater]

RogueBorg with his alt fell flat on his face here lol

[NBAGOAT]

i got where OP was coming from but the context was special. Jokic was leading a trash roster(gordon and jeff green only guys in rotation last year on this years team) to well above .500 while giannis and embiid werent leading their teams to great records. Booker was best player on easily the best team but he didnt deserve consideration